Moral Objectivism Or Cultural Relativism?

732 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Ethical objectivism and cultural relativism

I believe that everyone believes what they want to believe.We grow up in a certain culture that shape and form our moral objectivism. Many believe that cultural relativism is very plausible view of our morality. If a culture approves of an action, then there is no question about the rightness of their action. Regarding, subjective relativism morality is determined by right and wrong to everyone's individual belief. To some morality is a matter of personal taste, to that person his belief of what is right makes it right. Both cultural and subjective play a huge role in everyone's lives, or there might simply be no moral truths, only relative ones. Something that is a huge impact and will always be our beginning towards our personal morality which is formed, molded, and guided by our culture and experiences.
Each culture decides what is morally right and wrong, which cannot be mistaken. Moral judgement changes from culture to culture it's something we adapt to because we are surrounded by it, it molds our beliefs. Each culture has its own moral …show more content…

All of our choices that we make we do it because we think we are right if not we wouldn't be doing it, but for other you might be doing the wrong thing, but does that also make it wrong?. I think we grow up believing what our family and our culture provides us, from the very beginning we are processing what we think is “right” in our own mind. We all believe what we want to believe there's nothing that will change what we think is right unless we open our minds and try not to be one sided to every arguments that is presented upon us. In the end we set our own personal unique morals values and those set moral values guide our lives by the choices we make. There will always be a person who has different moral values, opinions, beliefs and that's ok we are all unique in our own way but it's a huge part of who we

Show More
Related

  • Martin Luther King Utilitarianism Essay

    2007 Words  | 5 Pages

    In its entirety, moral relativism is comprised of the belief that, as members of various and countless cultures, we cannot judge each other’s morality. If this theory stands true, then “we have no basis for judging other cultures or values,” according to Professor McCombs’ Ethics 2. Our moral theories cannot extend throughout cultures, as we do not all share similar values. For instance, the Catholic tradition believes in the sacrament of Reconciliation. This sacrament holds that confessing one’s sins to a priest and

    Read More

  • Solutions to Problems in the Film Do the Right Thing

    379 Words  | 1 Pages

    Yes, there can be different moral rules for different ethnic and cultural groups. Every culture should be allowed to follow their own set of moral rules to a certain extent .

    Read More

  • The Case Against Moral Relativism

    278 Words  | 1 Pages

    "Who's to judge who's right or wrong?" In the case against moral relativism Pojman provides an analysis of Relativism. His analysis includes an interpretation of Relativism that states the following ideas: Actions vary from society to society, individuals behavior depends on the society they belong to, and there are no standards of living that apply to all human kind. An example that demonstrates these ideas is people around the world eat beef (cows) and in India, cows are not to be eaten. From Pojman second analysis an example can be how the Japanese take of their shoes all the time before entering the house. In Mexico it is rare that people take off their shoes. They might find it wired or not normal. In his third analysis he gives that sense moral relativism and cultural relativism are tied together, that their can be no

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism vs. Cultural and Ethical Relativism

    718 Words  | 2 Pages

    Utilitarianism is an example of Consequentialist Ethics, where the morality of an action is determined by its accomplishing its desired results. In both scenarios the desired result was to save the lives of thousands of people in the community. Therefore, a Utilitarian would say that the actions taken in both of the scenarios are moral. Since an (Act) Utilitarian believes that actions should be judged according to the results it achieves. Happiness should not be simply one's own, but that of the greatest number. In both scenarios, the end result saved the lives of 5,000 members of the community. The end result is the only concern and to what extreme is taken to reach this result is of no matter. In these instances the things that are lost are an Inmates religious beliefs or a mothers fetus, on the other hand Thousands of citizens were saved from dying from this disease.

    Read More

  • Difference Between Relativism And Moral Objectivism

    1394 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the attempt to explain morality, two prominent theories exist- moral relativism and moral objectivism. Morality in a sense is difficult to explain, both theories attempt to shed a bit of light in way to break down its complexity. Moral Relativism argues in the view that morality exists only due to the fact that it is relative, or in respect to, cultural or individual beliefs. In a sense, it is up to the people to determine what is right and wrong. On the other hand, moral objectivism views that morality is not parallel, or relative, to one 's beliefs. That it is independent and not subjective to one 's interpretations, thus it is objective and universal moral facts exist. Louis. P. Pojman, an American philosopher and professor,

    Read More

  • Moral Relativism and Problems Associated With this Philosophy

    824 Words  | 2 Pages

    Moral relativists believe that no one has the right to judge another individuals choice, decisions, or lifestyle because however they choose to live is right for them. In addition everyone has the right to their own moral beliefs and to impose those beliefs on another individual is wrong. At first glance moral relativism may appear ideal in allowing for individual freedom. After all why shouldn’t each individual be entitled to their own idea of moral values and why should others force their beliefs on anyone else. “American philosopher and essayist, Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), tells us, what is right is only what the individual thinks is right. There is no higher court of appeals, no higher, universal, or absolute moral standard.” (pg 121) Moral relativism means if does not feel wrong than it must be right.

    Read More

  • Moral Objectivism

    631 Words  | 2 Pages

    Second, The Cultural Relativism Theory views that all beliefs and customs are relative to the individual within his or her own social context, The theory is about the nature of morality(). For example, It was believed that the Greeks thought it was wrong to eat the dead, However the Callatians believed it was okay to eat the dead. In that case no one can really judge the Greeks or the Callatians it is not right nor is it wrong to eat the dead that is matter of opinion(). These distinct arguments are examples of one fundamental idea(). There is no objective truth and it is a simple point of logic we all live in different socities and we all have different cultural backgrounds. When one culture ...

    Read More

  • Moral Objectivism Vs Moral Relativism

    1352 Words  | 3 Pages

    In ones adolescent years, an important figure or role model taught the values of morality, the importance between right and wrong and the qualities of good versus bad. As the years, decades, and centuries have passed by, the culture of morality and the principles that humankind lives by have shifted and changed over time. In the article, “Folk Moral Relativism”, the authors, Hagop Sarkissian, John Park, David Tien, Jennifer Cole Wright and Joshua Knobe discuss six different studies to support their new hypothesis. However, in order to understand this essay, one must comprehend the difference between moral objectivism and moral relativism, which is based on whether or not the view of what someone else believes in, is morally correct or incorrect. For instance, moral objectivism is not centered on a person’s beliefs of what is considered right and wrong, but instead, is founded on moral facts.

    Read More

  • Moral Relativism Is Relative To One's Culture

    1052 Words  | 3 Pages

    MORAL RELATIVISM Moral Relativism is the idea that there is no universal or absolute set of moral principles, meaning that what is morally right to you might not be morally right to me so it is more of “to each his or her own” and no one has the right to judge another. Moral relativism promotes tolerance because it encourages one to try to understand or accept other cultures and beliefs on their own terms, it believes that “when in Rome, do as the Romans do”. Ethics are moral principles that govern a person’s behavior or actions and I believe some things are simply either right or wrong and there are no grey areas like torturing an infant, rape and murder. As much as we would want to believe that morality is relative to one’s culture and

    Read More

  • Cultural Relativism Mexico City

    522 Words  | 2 Pages

    Therefore, morality is subjective and there is no objective morality. There is no one set of moral rules that the whole world should follow. According to cultural relativism, all the cultures

    Read More

  • Cultural Relativism

    897 Words  | 2 Pages

    It seems that a society's moral view can get better over time. The second problem cultural relativism faces is that it does not allow for any universal moral codes. The key for understanding cultural relativism is to know that different cultures have different moral codes, and morality is defined by mainstream culture. With this being said, there is no such thing

    Read More

  • What is Culture Relativism: Views by James Rachels

    957 Words  | 2 Pages

    Culture Relativism; what is it? Culture Relativism states that we cannot absolute say what is right and what is wrong because it all depends in the society we live in. James Rachels however, does not believe that we cannot absolute know that there is no right and wrong for the mere reason that cultures are different. Rachels as well believes that “certain basic values are common to all cultures.” I agree with Rachels in that culture relativism cannot assure us that there is no knowledge of what is right or wrong. I believe that different cultures must know what is right and what is wrong to do. Cultures are said to be different but if we look at them closely we can actually find that they are not so much different from one’s own culture. Religion for example is a right given to us and that many cultures around the world practices. Of course there are different types of religion but they all are worshipped and practice among the different culture.

    Read More

  • Moral Relativism

    1958 Words  | 4 Pages

    Moral relativism, as Harman describes, denies “that there are universal basic moral demands, and says different people are subject to different basic moral demands depending on the social customs, practices, conventions, and principles that they accept” (Harman, p. 85). Many suppose that moral feelings derive from sympathy and concern for others, but Harman rather believes that morality derives from agreement among people of varying powers and resources provides a more plausible explanation (Harman, p. 12).The survival of these values and morals is based on Darwin’s natural selection survival of the fittest theory. Many philosophers have argued for and against what moral relativism would do for the world. In this essay, we will discuss exactly what moral relativism entails, the consequences of taking it seriously, and finally the benefits if the theory were implemented.

    Read More

  • Difference Between Subjectivism And Cultural Relativism

    1252 Words  | 3 Pages

    Cultural Relativism has an entirely separate meaning. Because this idea defines moral principles as being rooted in the beliefs of a particular culture, it identifies right and wrong in terms of the practices of a specific group of people. For example, the Greeks would burn the bodies of their deceased members. However, the Callations would eat the bodies of their deceased. Assuming that Cultural Relativism is correct means viewing each of these practices as right for the respective culture. In the Greek culture, they say that burning bodies is how to treat the dead so this is right for their culture. On the other hand, the Callations say that eating bodies is the proper way to handle those that have passed on. Because the Callations say this is right, it is right for their culture. The same thought process holds true for practices that are seen as wrong in cultures. For example, the Japanese believe that laughing during business meetings is inappropriate. This is wrong because of Japan’s practices. Cultural Relativism makes moral assessments based on one culture’s

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism and Cultural Relativism

    714 Words  | 2 Pages

    For Cultural Relativism, it is perfectly normal that something one culture sees as moral, another may see as immoral. There is no connection between them so they are never in conflict relative to their moral beliefs. However, within the context of Ethical Relativism there’s a significant difference. Normally, two cultures will possess varying proportions of the same normal and abnormal habits yet from a cross-cultural standpoint, what is abnormal in one culture can be seen as properly normal in an...

    Read More

More about Moral Objectivism Or Cultural Relativism?

Open Document